Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

V.BAHULEYAN, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE versus STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


V.BAHULEYAN, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE v. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE - WP(C) No. 11017 of 2007(J) [2007] RD-KL 6791 (30 March 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 11017 of 2007(J)

1. V.BAHULEYAN, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent

2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,

3. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,

4. DEPARTMENTAL PROMOTION COMMITTEE,

For Petitioner :SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.K.DENESAN

Dated :30/03/2007

O R D E R

K.K.DENESAN, J.

WP(C)No. 11017 OF 2007

Dated this the 30th March, 2007.



JUDGMENT

The petitioner is working as Sub Inspector of Police in the District Crime Records Bureau, Thiruvananthapuram. He is due to retire from service by the end of May 2007. The petitioner's grievance as seen from the pleadings in this writ petition is identical to the grievance highlighted by petitioners in W.P(C) 333/2007 which was disposed of by Ext.P2 judgment. As per that judgment, this Court directed the respondents to see that the final seniority list is published within two months, the meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee is held immediately thereafter, at any rate, within six weeks from the date of publication of the final list, statutory rules governing selection are followed and persons found entitled for promotion based on the select list are promoted. It was also directed that in case the preparation of the select list is delayed, the competent among the respondents shall take appropriate decision after considering the necessity to issue orders promoting Sub Inspectors of Police temporarily as Circle Inspectors of Police.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the request of the petitioner to extend him also the benefit of Ext.P2 WPC 11017/2007 2 judgment shall have to be considered by the respondents.

3. I have heard Govt. Pleader for the respondents.

4. Having regard to the limited relief prayed for by the petitioner, I am inclined to dispose of the writ petition directing the respondents to extend to the petitioner also the benefit of Ext.P2 judgment, provided he is similarly situated and comes within the field of choice for transfer appointment to the post of Circle Inspector of Police. Ordered accordingly. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the respondents for necessary action. K.K.DENESAN Judge jj


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.